Aristotle`s lantern 08

Cah. Biol. Mar. (2008) 49 : 299-302
Aristotle’s lantern in echinoderms: an ancient riddle
Eleni VOULTSIADOU and Chariton CHINTIROGLOU
Aristotle University, School of Biology, Department of Zoology, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
E. Voultsiadou, Tel & Fax: +302310998321. E-mail: [email protected]
C. Chintiroglou, Tel: +302310998405, Fax: +302310998269. E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: The body structure, life habit and diversity of the sea-urchins were first described by Aristotle in the 4th century
BC. Early zoologists, having studied his zoological works, introduced the name “Aristotle’s lantern” for the jaw apparatus
of echinoids. The term has become fully accepted in the vocabulary of modern invertebrate zoology, but it has been disputed
by scholars claiming that the original description actually addressed the test and not the mouth of the sea urchin. The
problem remained long unsolved due to lack of evidence. The combined investigation conducted in the classical literature
and the archaeological findings from the area and the period Aristotle lived, unravelled the riddle. Bronze, perforated
lanterns diffusing and protecting the lamp light inside were found during excavations in Northern Greece localities,
confirming the relevant descriptions given by classical authors. These lanterns with their lamp proved to be the model for
Aristotle’s description, corresponding to the test and the jaw apparatus respectively. Thus, it is suggested that the term
“Aristotle’s lantern” should be correctly used for the test of the sea urchin and not for its jaw apparatus traditionally referred
to as such. These results demonstrate how tracing back to the historical roots of the science of zoology and combining data
from different disciplines can help in redefining scientific terms and concepts.
Résumé : La lanterne d’Aristote chez les Echinodermes : une vieille énigme. La structure du corps, l’habitat et la diversité
des oursins ont été décrits en premier par Aristote au 4ème siècle avant J.C. Les premiers zoologistes, ayant étudié ses
travaux de zoologie, ont introduit le terme de “lanterne d’Aristote” pour désigner l’appareil masticatoire des oursins. Le
terme a été intégré dans le vocabulaire de la zoologie moderne mais il a été décrié par certaines écoles arguant que la
description originelle désignait en fait le test et non la bouche de l’oursin. Faute d’évidence, le problème est resté longtemps
insoluble. Une recherche combinée à la fois dans la littérature classique et les découvertes archéologiques correspondant à
la région et à l’époque d’Aristote a permis de résoudre l’énigme. Des lanternes de bronze diffusant la lumière et protégeant
la lampe ont été trouvées lors de fouilles dans des localités du nord de la Grèce, confirmant la pertinence des descriptions
données par les auteurs classiques. Ces lanternes et leur lampe ont constitué le modèle de la description d’Aristote et
correspondent respectivement au test et à la mâchoire. Il est suggéré d’utiliser le terme de “lanterne d’Aristote” pour le test
des oursins plutôt que pour la mâchoire comme c’est habituellement le cas. Ce travail montre comment l’analyse des
origines historiques de la zoologie et le couplage de différentes disciplines peuvent nous aider à redéfinir les termes et les
concepts scientifiques.
Keywords: Aristotle’s lantern l Echinodermata l Sea urchin l History of zoology
Reçu le 16 mai 2008 ; accepté après révision le 23 juin 2008.
Received 16 May 2008; accepted in revised form 23 June 2008.
300
ARISTOTLE’S LANTERN IN ECHINODERMS
Introduction
The highly developed jaw apparatus of the sea urchin,
named after Aristotle, is the most famous and controversial
among the eponymous structures of echinoderms. Jacob
Klein, in his Naturalis Dispositio Echinodermatum was the
first to specifically refer to it as “Aristotle’s lantern” in
1734 (Lawrence, 2001). His suggestion was based on
Rondelet’s observation that the structure described by
Aristotle in the History of Animals (531a3-5) as resembling
a lantern was the jaw apparatus of the animal (Cole, 1950).
Modern echinoderm specialists, invertebrate zoologists,
and biologists in general (Lawrence, 2001; Ruppert et al.,
2004; Sodergren et al., 2006) have fully accepted the term
without having thoroughly examined its origin. However,
according to scholars and biologists who studied the
classical texts (Thompson, 1947; Cole, 1950; Peck, 1970)
the passage of the alleged original description remains
obscure, still awaiting a satisfactory interpretation. In the
present paper an attempt is made to trace back the origin of
“Aristotle’s lantern” and redefine the term, on the basis of
evidence from the archaeological record and the classical
texts.
Materials and Methods
A thorough examination of the written documents from the
Greek and Greek-Roman antiquity, as well as the archaeological record of the period in which Aristotle lived was
made. This was achieved through: i) a scanning of the
classical Greek literature using the Thesaurus Linguae
Graecae digital library (TLGE, 2007) offered by the
University of California; in this way, all records of lanterns
were collected and studied (the citations of the classical
works given below refer to their TLG versions), ii) an
examination of the archaeological findings exhibited in the
archaeological museums of northern Greece, and more
specifically, the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki
and the Museum of Vergina royal tombs.
Results and Discussion
The confusing three lines in Aristotle’s History of Animals
(531a3-5) describing the sea urchins morphology read: “In
respect of its beginning and end the mouth (or body) of the
urchin is continuous, though in respect of its superficial
appearance it is not continuous, but similar to a lantern not
having a surrounding skin”.
The main difficulty in interpreting this passage lies in the
old manuscripts on which the classical text of The History
of animals was based: it is not clear whether one should
read stoma, i.e. jaw apparatus, or soma, i.e. body. Another
point of confusion is the real meaning of the contrasting
phrases regarding the continuity. The lack of a
“surrounding skin” further complicates the situation.
So far, three interpretations have been given. A minority
reading stoma (Thompson, 1947) retained the use of the
zoological term “lantern” for the jaw apparatus. The
majority accepted the version reading soma (Cole, 1950;
Peck, 1970) since this was the case in most of the old
manuscripts (Cole, 1950). Under this perspective, the term
“Aristotle’s lantern” should indicate the test of the urchin
(Peck, 1970), or the test and the jaw apparatus together, like
a lantern with its lamp (Cole, 1950). In the most recent
study Lennox (1984) sides with those reading soma but
gives an interpretation of his own attributing the “skin” to
the test of the urchin, and “the lantern without its skin” to
its internal viscera. He also gives two interpretations
regarding the lack of continuity in the superficial
appearance of the urchin: Aristotle meant either that the test
consisted of a mail of plates fitting closely edge to edge, or
that the internal viscera was not apparently connected to the
outer sphere after dissection.
The main problem in adopting any of the above
scenarios according to Peck (1970) and Lennox (1984),
who gave the most detailed analyses, was that no archaeological evidence about lanterns (lampteres) in Aristotle’s
time has been found, although very many lamps (lychnoi)
have survived. The two classical words had the same
meaning as they do today, the lantern indicating a portable
lighting device (a lamp holder) with a transparent or
translucent protective case, used to illuminate broad areas.
The lamp, on the other hand is any device that produces
illumination (candle, oil lamp) used on its own or placed
inside a lamp holder.
The examination of the written documents showed that
lanterns of various kinds have been used since the time of
Homer. Empedocles (5th c. BC, Fragmenta 84.9 and 14)
and Aeneas (4th c. BC, Poliorcetica 22.21.3) mention that a
lamp was placed inside a lantern to protect the light source
from the wind without however giving any information on
their structure. Photius (9th c. AD, Lexicon page 238 line 8)
explains that lanterns in antiquity were made of clean
translucent skins or perforated ceramic to permit light diffusion. Theophrastus, a contemporary and friend of
Aristotle, mentions that at their time they used to protect the
lamps inside bronze lanterns which prevented the light
from blowing out, since the wind could hardly reach the
light source (De igne 22.2).
Moreover, the very fruitful investigation in the
Archaeological Museums of Northern Greece revealed two
lanterns of the bronze type as described by Theophrastus
(Fig. 1A & B).
On the basis of the above evidence, we can conclude that
Aristotle in the troublesome passage was comparing the test
E. VOULTSIADOU, C. CHINTIROGLOU
301
Figure 1. Ancient lamp holders (lanterns) from Northern Greece localities. A. The Vergina lantern coming from the tomb identified
as that of King Philip II, dated to the third quarter of the 4th century BC (Museum of Vergina royal tombs). B. The Derveni lantern found
in one of the tombs at the necropolis of Ancient Lete, dated to the last quarter of the 4th century BC (Archaeological Museum of
Thessaloniki).
Figure 1. Lampe ancienne (lanterne) du nord de la Grèce. A. La lanterne Vergina venant de la tombe identifiée comme celle du Roi
Philippe II, est datée du troisième trimestre du 4ème siècle avant J.C. (Musée des tombeaux royaux de Vergina). B. La lanterne Derveni
trouvée dans une des tombes de la Nécropole de l’ancient Lete, est datée du dernier quart du 4ème siècle avant J.C. (Musée archéologique
de Thessalonique).
of the sea urchin with a bronze lantern, discriminating it
from the lanterns made of skin. Under this perspective, it is
clear that by the phrase “in respect to the superficial
appearance it is not continuous” he indicated the surface of
the sea urchin test perforated by the pore pairs of the tube
feet (Fig. 2A). Thus, the interpretation by Lennox (1983)
presented above, proves incorrect. The continuity in respect
to the beginning and the end most probably refers to the
continuous, unified shell starting from the oral and ending
in the aboral area (Fig. 2B). Aristotle included the
echinoderms in ostrakoderma i.e. the animals having a hard
shell surrounding the body (Voultsiadou & Vafidis, 2007)
and in this way he most likely contrasted the structure of
their shell to that of other ostakoderma such as the bivalves
(dithyra), the conical univalves (monothyra) and the spiralshelled gastropods (stromvode).
So, Cole’s (1950) opinion that, according to Aristotle,
the lantern is the test and the lamp is the jaw apparatus has
been confirmed thanks to the evidence offered by the
classical texts and the archaeological record. It is therefore
proposed that the test of the sea urchin and not the jaw
apparatus should be called “Aristotle’s lantern”.
The case of the sea urchin is a good example of how
multidisciplinary research and the study of the beginnings
302
ARISTOTLE’S LANTERN IN ECHINODERMS
Figure 2. Sea urchin tests. A. Aboral area of the common Aegean species Sphaerechinus granularis (Lamarck, 1816) showing the
surface perforations. B. Entire test of the same species illuminated by a lamp inside.
Figure 2. Test d’oursin. A. Zone aborale de l’espèce commune égéenne Sphaerechinus granularis (Lamarck, 1816) montrant les
perforations de surface. B. Test entier de la meme espèce illuminée par une lampe intérieure.
of a science can help in answering long lasting questions
and forming uniform generally accepted scientific
concepts.
References
Cole F.J. 1950. Aristotle’s lantern. Centaurus, 1: 377.
Lawrence J.M. 2001. Function of eponymous structures in
echinoderms: a review. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 79:
1251-1264.
Lennox J. G. 1984. Aristotle’s lantern. Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 103: 147-151.
Peck A.L. 1970. Aristotle. History of Animals. Books IV-VI.
English translation, Introduction and Comments. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Ruppert E.E., Fox R.S. & Barnes R.D. 2004. Invertebrate
Zoology. A functional evolutionary approach. Thompson
Brooks Cole. 963 pp.
Sodergren E., Shen Y., Song X., Zhang L., Gibbs A. &
Weinstock G.M. 2006. Shedding genomic light on Aristotle’s
lantern. Developmental Biology, 300: 2-8.
Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLGE) 2007. A digital library of
Greek literature, University of California. Available from:
http://www.tlg.uci.edu
Thompson D’Arcy W. 1947. A Glossary of Greek fishes. Oxford
University Press, London. 302 pp.
Voultsiadou E. and Vafidis D. 2007. Marine invertebrate diversity in Aristotle’s zoology. Contributions to Zoology, 76: 103120.